Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, TheReal_jayD said:

110%

Appreciate  your information.  I didn't mean that to come across wrong, if it did.  I sincerely appreciate your inside information and fully understand your needing to be tight lipped on a majority of the information you have access to.

Edited by UNTLifer
  • Upvote 1
  • Eye Roll 2
  • Downvote 3
Posted
1 hour ago, TheReal_jayD said:

I have got no updates yet. Some interviews have taking place. I think no urgency until coaching carousel slow downs. With candidate pool and money being discussed I think both OC and DC will be highly upgraded.

Thanks!

  • Upvote 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TheReal_jayD said:

I have got no updates yet. Some interviews have taking place. I think no urgency until coaching carousel slow downs. With candidate pool and money being discussed I think both OC and DC will be highly upgraded.

They didn’t dive into this in the 247 articles, but do you know what Mccrae and Dempsey were pitched as far as what type of front to expect? 

Given that Dempsey was a 3-tech in JUCO, I could see the coaches telling him he’d play 3-tech whether we go with a 3-man or 4-man front. Maybe same for Mccrae at end, but it’s interesting to me that we were able to get such solid JUCO players who had so many other options with no defensive coordinator or scheme to show them where they’d fit.

Edited by BillySee58
  • Upvote 5
Posted
24 minutes ago, BillySee58 said:

They didn’t dive into this in the 247 articles, but do you know what Mccrae and Dempsey were pitched as far as what type of front to expect? 

Given that Dempsey was a 3-tech in JUCO, I could see the coaches telling him he’d play 3-tech whether we go with a 3-man or 4-man front. Maybe same for Mccrae at end, but it’s interesting to me that we were able to get such solid JUCO players who had so many other options with no defensive coordinator or scheme to show them where they’d fit.

I think with our current DT/DE rotation we'd be better suited with a 4 man front, but that's just a personal preference. It's really difficult to get true 1-techs. I'd much rather see a 4-2-5 with two SS(one being the rover or whatever position. Somebody like Alex Morris comes to mind) over a 3-3-5

  • Upvote 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, MGNation92 said:

I think with our current DT/DE rotation we'd be better suited with a 4 man front, but that's just a personal preference. It's really difficult to get true 1-techs. I'd much rather see a 4-2-5 with two SS(one being the rover or whatever position. Somebody like Alex Morris comes to mind) over a 3-3-5

I agree. Except I think our personnel is best suited for a 4-3, which I think is easier to recruit to as well (probably why we were able to bring in the personnel for it). KD Davis, Tyreke Davis, Kevin Wood, Gabriel Murphy, Grayson Murphy, Larry Nixon, Chris Thornton, Jordan Hunt, Taylor Jacobs, Jordan Brown, and Jacobi Johnson all are projected to be second-level linebackers on scholarship next year with only one of those 11 being a senior. 

If we choose to run a scheme that only utilizes two second level linebackers, then we have grossly mismanaged that position from a standpoint of how many scholarships we have assigned to it.

  • Upvote 4
  • Lovely Take 1
Posted
58 minutes ago, BillySee58 said:

I agree. Except I think our personnel is best suited for a 4-3, which I think is easier to recruit to as well (probably why we were able to bring in the personnel for it). KD Davis, Tyreke Davis, Kevin Wood, Gabriel Murphy, Grayson Murphy, Larry Nixon, Chris Thornton, Jordan Hunt, Taylor Jacobs, Jordan Brown, and Jacobi Johnson all are projected to be second-level linebackers on scholarship next year with only one of those 11 being a senior. 

If we choose to run a scheme that only utilizes two second level linebackers, then we have grossly mismanaged that position from a standpoint of how many scholarships we have assigned to it.

Good point. I would only be concerned with pass coverage with three linebackers since CUSA is fairly wide open when it comes to offense. I guess if we can bring enough pressure with the front 7 then secondary wont matter as much

  • Upvote 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, MGNation92 said:

Good point. I would only be concerned with pass coverage with three linebackers since CUSA is fairly wide open when it comes to offense. I guess if we can bring enough pressure with the front 7 then secondary wont matter as much

And that’s the logic of why we have been a 3-3-5 under Littrell to this point. Our best defense in this conference was a 4-3 defense back in 2013. 

If you compare the passing offenses in our conference to the entire country, a few of the top teams in our conference ranked fairly high but overall our conference was not filled with passing offenses in the top half of the country. Plus, USM and La Tech were two of the top passing offenses in the conference and 23rd and 31st in the country respectively. And our scheme didn’t help at all with the personnel we were putting out there.

  • Upvote 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BillySee58 said:

I agree. Except I think our personnel is best suited for a 4-3, which I think is easier to recruit to as well (probably why we were able to bring in the personnel for it). KD Davis, Tyreke Davis, Kevin Wood, Gabriel Murphy, Grayson Murphy, Larry Nixon, Chris Thornton, Jordan Hunt, Taylor Jacobs, Jordan Brown, and Jacobi Johnson all are projected to be second-level linebackers on scholarship next year with only one of those 11 being a senior. 

If we choose to run a scheme that only utilizes two second level linebackers, then we have grossly mismanaged that position from a standpoint of how many scholarships we have assigned to it.

A true 3-4 would be fine as well.  Most of those guys are sideline-to-sideline guys, and Tyreke already has quite a bit of experience in coverage playing the Nickle in 2018.   Having all of these athletic LB's flying around in coverage underneath the secondary and blitzing from who-knows-where would be nice.

  • Upvote 2
Posted
25 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

A true 3-4 would be fine as well.  Most of those guys are sideline-to-sideline guys, and Tyreke already has quite a bit of experience in coverage playing the Nickle in 2018.   Having all of these athletic LB's flying around in coverage underneath the secondary and blitzing from who-knows-where would be nice.

Sure, but given that our linebackers are smaller, and probably will continue to be at the G5 level, having four down linemen helps keep the offensive line off of our linebackers. That was a huge problem this year.

  • Upvote 3
Posted
2 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

Our best defense in this conference was a 4-3 defense back in 2013. 

 

Skladany's defenses were tough.  I miss them.  It was solid when we had an offense that could keep them off the field enough to get rest.  I will never forget being in Apogee for The Stand.

  • Upvote 6
Posted
17 hours ago, BillySee58 said:

And that’s the logic of why we have been a 3-3-5 under Littrell to this point. Our best defense in this conference was a 4-3 defense back in 2013. 

True, but we didn’t a pretty good job with the right personnel last year in this scheme. 
Because if this year’s disaster people seem to have forgotten we only gave up 22 points a game last season. 
https://www.espn.com/college-football/stats/team/_/view/defense/stat/total/season/2018/table/passing/sort/totalPointsPerGame/dir/asc

  • Upvote 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, MrStrange18 said:

When did we hire Reeder last year?  Just trying to curb my expectations if it wasnt until well into the Spring...

Harrell was hired at USC on 1/28/19, a couple of weeks after Kingsbury took the Cardinals job, and we filled his spot with Reeder on 2/11/19.    So last year was probably an aberration of timeline due to that circumstance.   
Kingsbury was hired as USC's OC on 12/4/18.  So I would hope we will know something VERY soon.

  • Upvote 3

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.